News
Ex-SpaceX engine expert to help design rockets built for launch on world’s largest jet
Stratolaunch, an aerospace company funded by Microsoft-made billionaire Paul Allen to build the world’s largest flightworthy aircraft, has announced a decision to build its own liquid-fueled rockets, to be air-launched from the aforementioned mega-plane.
Targeting an inaugural launch of the first version of the rocket – currently nicknamed “Kraken” – as early as 2022, Stratolaunch has chosen Jeff Thornburg, formerly SpaceX’s Vice President of Propulsion Engineering and the father of the company’s Mars-focused Raptor engine, to lead its foray into in-house rocket propulsion development and manufacturing.
Stratolaunch has confirmed what most people have long speculated: it’s developing its own launch vehicles for its air-launch system, including a reusable space plane that could eventually carry people. pic.twitter.com/nF9lKVe4xk
— Jeff Foust (@jeff_foust) August 20, 2018
But first: building the world’s largest aircraft
Stratolaunch’s first task at hand, however, is to begin flight-testing the largest (hopefully) operational aircraft in history, a prerequisite for the company’s longer-term orbital rocket and spaceplane aspirations. Nicknamed “Roc” after a mythical (and fictional) bird so large it could carry an elephant, the plane certainly lives up to its namesake. Featuring a full six of the same engines that power Boeing’s once-record-breaking 747 airliner and a wingspan that could easily fit three smaller 737 airliners with room to spare, it is genuinely difficult (if not impossible) to successfully convey the sheer scale of Roc outside of witnessing it in person.
Stationed in California’s Mojave Desert, the aircraft’s one and only copy is, for the most part, completed and has spent the brunt of 2018 conducting runway taxi tests, hopefully culminating in an inaugural flight test later this year or early next year. Designed to lift orbital-class rockets weighing as much as 250 metric tons (550,000 lb) to an altitude of at least 9100 meters (30,000 feet), the primary benefit of using aircraft as launch platforms derives from the simple fact that the atmospheric density at 30,000 feet is more than three times less than that at sea level. Similar to aircraft, rocket performance dramatically improves as atmospheric density decreases: less atmosphere means lower drag and pressure.
Rockets that launch from sea-level have to grapple with the difficulties of Earth’s relatively thick atmosphere at that height, with major launch events like “Max-Q” being big concerns almost solely because the dense air exerts major forces on launch vehicles and demands extreme measures like throttling down booster engines (very inefficient) and optimizing structures for aerodynamic efficiency despite the fact that rockets spend very little time operating in a significant atmosphere.
A launch pad without a rocket (sort of)
However, the simple fact of the matter is that billionaire Paul Allen’s colossal aircraft essentially does not have a single air-launched rocket in the world that can properly take advantage of its capabilities. Originally sized and designed with an air-launched version of SpaceX’s Falcon 9 in mind, that relationship folded amicably after roughly a year (2012), at which point SpaceX realized it would need to almost completely redesign a unique variant of Falcon 9. Your author will readily admit that they have admired the insanity of such a massive plane while still severely doubting its practical utility.
Thankfully, it appears that Allen is adamantly opposed to the idea that Stratolaunch is some silly whim to build the world’s largest plane. Rather, he is exceptionally reserved and pragmatic when discussing the aerial launch platform, according to a recent and extensive interview by Wired Magazine’s Steven Levy.
“Allen isn’t one to show exuberance, and when he speaks about the plane he focuses on its future utility. ‘When you see that giant plane, it’s a little nutty,’ he says. ‘And you don’t build it unless you’re very serious, not only about wanting to see the plane fly but to see it fulfill its purpose. Which is getting vehicles in orbit.’ – Paul Allen, 2018
-
- Stratolaunch’s Roc shown with a triplet of Orbital ATK Pegasus XL rockets. (Vulcan Space)
-
- Back in 2012, SpaceX briefly entertained the idea of a Falcon 9 variant optimized for air-launch, potentially including crew rating the rocket down the road. (Stratolaunch/Dynetics)
-
- The Roc is inconceivably vast. (Stratolaunch)
Currently, Orbital ATK’s (now Northrop Grumman Innovation Systems) air-launched Pegasus XL rocket is the only “customer” in the world that can realistically use Stratolaunch as a launch platform, not exactly an impressive or sustainable launch vehicle with a maximum performance of less than 450 kg (~1000 lbs) to low Earth orbit for an incredible ~$40 million per (expendable) flight.
To answer that call and ensure Stratolaunch’s utility, the company reportedly began seriously considering its own in-house expendable and reusable rockets and propulsion systems sometime in 2016, plans that have since grown concrete and been publicly embedded into Stratolaunch’s overarching mission. Nicknamed “Kraken” after the mythical sea monster, the company hopes to develop an initially expendable rocket system capable of launching 3400 – 6000 kg (~7500 – 13250 lbs) into low Earth orbit with single booster and triple booster variants. Further down the line, Stratolaunch is eyeing the design and production of a fully and rapidly reusable orbital spaceplane, potentially including a version that would carry astronauts into space.
-
- A concept video produced by Stratolaunch shows the Roc launching a Kraken rocket. (Stratolaunch, via Wired)
-
- A concept video produced by Stratolaunch shows the Roc launching a Kraken rocket. (Stratolaunch, via Wired)
-
- A concept video produced by Stratolaunch shows the Roc launching a Kraken rocket. (Stratolaunch, via Wired)
-
- SpaceX’s subscale Raptor engine has completed more than 1200 seconds of testing in less than two years. (SpaceX)
-
- BFS (circa 2017) shows off its complement of SL and Vacuum Raptor engines. SpaceX is moving back to something similar to this. (SpaceX)
Normally, one might simply roll their eyes at yet another startup touting small(ish) expendable rockets with first launches no earlier than the early 2020s – the market is getting to be absurdly and impossibly overcrowded at this point. However, Stratolaunch differs for one fundamental and reason: they have placed ex-SpaceX propulsion executive and expert Jeff Thornburg at the helm of the company’s freshly public rocket propulsion wing. While at SpaceX, Mr. Thornburg spent all but one of his five years with the company (2011-2015) single-mindedly focused on the development and engineering of all aspects of the Raptor rocket engine, a next-generation propulsion system designed to enable SpaceX’s sustainable colonization of Mars.
Raptor is an exceptional rocket engine thanks in no small part to Thornburg’s brilliance as a propulsion engineer, and that same brilliance and half-decade of experience at the most successful rocket startup in existence could ultimately prove a massive boon for Stratolaunch’s otherwise interesting but unexceptional expendable rocket concepts.
Put simply, under Jeff Thornburg’s direction and with access to founder Paul Allen’s considerable wealth, Stratolaunch is undoubtedly worth keeping a close eye in the future, both far and near.
For prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket recovery fleet check out our brand new LaunchPad and LandingZone newsletters!
News
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.2.2.5 might be the most confusing release ever
With each Full Self-Driving release, I am realistic. I know some things are going to get better, and I know some things will regress slightly. However, these instances of improvements are relatively mild, as are the regressions. Yet, this version has shown me that it contains extremes of both.
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.2.2.5 hit my car back on Valentine’s Day, February 14, and since I’ve had it, it has become, in my opinion, the most confusing release I’ve ever had.
With each Full Self-Driving release, I am realistic. I know some things are going to get better, and I know some things will regress slightly. However, these instances of improvements are relatively mild, as are the regressions. Yet, this version has shown me that it contains extremes of both.
It has been about three weeks of driving on v14.2.2.5; I’ve used it for nearly every mile traveled since it hit my car. I’ve taken short trips of 10 minutes or less, I’ve taken medium trips of an hour or less, and I’ve taken longer trips that are over 100 miles per leg and are over two hours of driving time one way.
These are my thoughts on it thus far:
Speed Profiles Are a Mixed Bag
Speed Profiles are something Tesla seems to tinker with quite frequently, and each version tends to show a drastic difference in how each one behaves compared to the previous version.
I do a vast majority of my FSD travel using Standard and Hurry modes, although in bad weather, I will scale it back to Chill, and when it’s a congested city on a weekend or during rush hour, I’ll throw it into Mad Max so it takes what it needs.
Early on, Speed Profiles really felt great. This is one of those really subjective parts of the FSD where someone might think one mode travels too quickly, whereas another person might see the identical performance as too slow or just right.
To me, I would like to see more consistency from release to release on them, but overall, things are pretty good. There are no real complaints on my end, as I had with previous releases.
In a past release, Mad Max traveled under the speed limit quite frequently, and I only had that experience because Hurry was acting the same way. I’ve had no instances of that with v14.2.2.5.
Strange Turn Signal Behavior
This is the first Full Self-Driving version where I’ve had so many weird things happen with the turn signals.
Two things come to mind: Using a turn signal on a sharp turn, and ignoring the navigation while putting the wrong turn signal on. I’ve encountered both things on v14.2.2.5.
On my way to the Supercharger, I take a road that has one semi-sharp right-hand turn with a driveway entrance right at the beginning of the turn.
Only recently, with the introduction of v14.2.2.5, have I had FSD put on the right turn signal when going around this turn. It’s obviously a minor issue, but it still happens, and it’s not standard practice:
How can we get Full Self-Driving to stop these turn signals?
There’s no need to use one here; the straight path is a driveway, not a public road. The right turn signal here is unnecessary pic.twitter.com/7uLDHnqCfv
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) February 28, 2026
When sharing this on X, I had Tesla fans (the ones who refuse to acknowledge that the company can make mistakes) tell me that it’s a “valid” behavior that would be taught to anyone who has been “professionally trained” to drive.
Apparently, if you complain about this turn signal, you are also claiming you know more than Tesla engineers…okay.
Nobody in their right mind has ever gone around a sharp turn when driving their car and put on a signal when continuing on the same road. You would put a left turn signal on to indicate you were turning into that driveway if that’s what your intention was.
Like I said, it’s a totally minor issue. However, it’s not really needed, and nor is it normal. If I were in the car with someone who was taking a simple turn on a road they were traveling, and they signaled because the turn was sharp, I’d be scratching my head.
I’ve also had three separate instances of the car completely ignoring the navigation and putting on a signal that is opposite to what the routing says. Really quite strange.
Parking Performance is Still Underwhelming
Parking has been a complaint of mine with FSD for a long time, so much so that it is pretty rare that I allow the vehicle to park itself. More often than not, it is because I want to pick a spot that is relatively isolated.
However, in the times I allow it to pull into a spot, it still does some pretty head-scratching things.
Recently, it tried to back into a spot that was ~60% covered in plowed snow. The snow was piled about six feet high in a Target parking lot.
A few days later, it tried backing into a spot where someone failed the universal litmus test of returning their shopping cart. Both choices were baffling and required me to manually move the car to a different portion of the lot.
I used Autopark on both occasions, and it did a great job of getting into the spot. I notice that the parking performance when I manually choose the spot is much better than when the car does the entire parking process, meaning choosing the spot and parking in it.
It’s Doing Things (For Me) It’s Never Done Before
Two things that FSD has never done before, at least for me, are slow down in School Zones and avoid deer. The first is something I usually take over manually, and the second I surprisingly have not had to deal with yet.
I had my Tesla slow down at a school zone yesterday for the first time, traveling at 20 MPH and not 15 MPH as the sign suggested, but at the speed of other cars in the School Zone. This was impressive and the first time I experienced it.
I would like to see this more consistently, and I think School Zones should be one of those areas where, no matter what, FSD will only travel the speed limit.
Last night, FSD v14.2.2.5 recognized a deer in a roadside field and slowed down for it:
🚨 Cruising home on a rainy, foggy evening and my Tesla on Full Self-Driving begins to slow down suddenly
FSD just wanted Mr. Deer to make it home to his deer family ❤️ pic.twitter.com/cAeqVDgXo5
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 4, 2026
Navigation Still SUCKS
Navigation will be a complaint until Tesla proves it can fix it. For now, it’s just terrible.
It still has not figured out how to leave my neighborhood. I give it the opportunity to prove me wrong each time I leave my house, and it just can’t do it.
It always tries to go out of the primary entrance/exit of the neighborhood when the route needs to take me left, even though that exit is a right turn only. I always leave a voice prompt for Tesla about it.
It still picks incredibly baffling routes for simple navigation. It’s the one thing I still really want Tesla to fix.
Investor's Corner
Tesla gets tip of the hat from major Wall Street firm on self-driving prowess
“Tesla is at the forefront of autonomous driving, supported by a camera-only approach that is technically harder but much cheaper than the multi-sensor systems widely used in the industry. This strategy should allow Tesla to scale more profitably compared to Robotaxi competitors, helped by a growing data engine from its existing fleet,” BoA wrote.
Tesla received a tip of the hat from major Wall Street firm Bank of America on Wednesday, as it reinitiated coverage on Tesla shares with a bullish stance that comes with a ‘Buy’ rating and a $460 price target.
In a new note that marks a sharp reversal from its neutral position earlier in 2025, the bank declared Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) technology the “leading consumer autonomy solution.”
Analysts highlighted Tesla’s camera-only architecture, known as Tesla Vision, as a strategic masterstroke. While technically more challenging than the multi-sensor setups favored by rivals, the vision-based approach is dramatically cheaper to produce and maintain.
This cost edge, combined with Tesla’s rapidly expanding real-world data engine, positions the company to scale robotaxis far more profitably than competitors, BofA argues in the new note:
“Tesla is at the forefront of autonomous driving, supported by a camera-only approach that is technically harder but much cheaper than the multi-sensor systems widely used in the industry. This strategy should allow Tesla to scale more profitably compared to Robotaxi competitors, helped by a growing data engine from its existing fleet.”
The bank now attributes roughly 52% of Tesla’s total valuation to its Robotaxi ambitions. It also flagged meaningful upside from the Optimus humanoid robot program and the fast-growing energy storage business, suggesting the auto segment’s recent headwinds, including expired incentives, are being eclipsed by these higher-margin opportunities.
Tesla’s own data underscores exactly why Wall Street is waking up to FSD’s potential. According to Tesla’s official safety reporting page, the FSD Supervised fleet has now surpassed 8.4 billion cumulative miles driven.
Tesla FSD (Supervised) fleet passes 8.4 billion cumulative miles
That total ballooned from just 6 million miles in 2021 to 80 million in 2022, 670 million in 2023, 2.25 billion in 2024, and a staggering 4.25 billion in 2025 alone. In the first 50 days of 2026, owners added another 1 billion miles — averaging more than 20 million miles per day.
This avalanche of real-world, camera-captured footage, much of it on complex city streets, gives Tesla an unmatched training dataset. Every mile feeds its neural networks, accelerating improvement cycles that lidar-dependent rivals simply cannot match at scale.
Tesla owners themselves will tell you the suite gets better with every release, bringing new features and improvements to its self-driving project.
The $460 target implies roughly 15 percent upside from recent trading levels around $400. While regulatory and safety hurdles remain, BofA’s endorsement signals growing institutional conviction that Tesla’s data advantage is not hype; it’s a tangible moat already delivering billions of miles of proof.
News
Tesla to discuss expansion of Samsung AI6 production plans: report
Tesla has reportedly requested an additional 24,000 wafers per month, which would bring total production capacity to around 40,000 wafers if finalized.
Tesla is reportedly discussing an expansion of its next-generation AI chip supply deal with Samsung Electronics.
As per a report from Korean industry outlet The Elec, Tesla purchasing executives are reportedly scheduled to meet Samsung officials this week to negotiate additional production volume for the company’s upcoming AI6 chip.
Industry sources cited in the report stated that Tesla is pushing to increase the production volume of its AI6 chip, which will be manufactured using Samsung’s 2-nanometer process.
Tesla previously signed a long-term foundry agreement with Samsung covering AI6 production through December 31, 2033. The deal was reportedly valued at about 22.8 trillion won (roughly $16–17 billion).
Under the existing agreement, Tesla secured approximately 16,000 wafers per month from the facility. The company has reportedly requested an additional 24,000 wafers per month, which would bring total production capacity to around 40,000 wafers if finalized.
Tesla purchasing executives are expected to discuss detailed supply terms during their visit to Samsung this week.
The AI6 chip is expected to support several Tesla technologies. Industry sources stated that the chip could be used for the company’s Full Self-Driving system, the Optimus humanoid robot, and Tesla’s internal AI data centers.
The report also indicated that AI6 clusters could replace the role previously planned for Tesla’s Dojo AI supercomputer. Instead of a single system, multiple AI6 chips would be combined into server-level clusters.
Tesla’s semiconductor collaboration with Samsung dates back several years. Samsung participated in the design of Tesla’s HW3 (AI3) chip and manufactured it using a 14-nanometer process. The HW4 chip currently used in Tesla vehicles was also produced by Samsung using a 5-nanometer node.
Tesla previously planned to split production of its AI5 chip between Samsung and TSMC. However, the company reportedly chose Samsung as the primary partner for the newer AI6 chip.
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.2.2.5 might be the most confusing release ever
Tesla gets tip of the hat from major Wall Street firm on self-driving prowess
